11 ms·
You do realize that this is simply a page that advocates using plain JavaScript and isn’t an actual “framework” right? I mean I can see the point you are tryin
by no_wizard 8y ago
You do realize that this is simply a page that advocates using plain JavaScript and isn’t an actual “framework” right?
I mean I can see the point you are trying to make, but it feels mildly disingenuous to link to this without explaining what you really mean.
- danlugo92 8y agoIt's just a joke really.
- cpburns2009 8y agoI have a better one. Knock knock... blank page... <Ctrl>+<Shift>+<I>: "Uncaught TypeError: cannot read property 'a' of undefined."
- ericwood 8y agoPeople really enjoy pulling this up every time a JS framework is talked about, and it's really tiring. I say this as someone whose entire job is writing "vanilla JS" without any sort of framework! People do have a tendency to overdo tooling and lean too heavily on frameworks to get things done, but if you're building something without one you end up creating a lot of abstractions and boilerplate yourself to do anything relatively advanced and end up with a micro-framework of sorts at the end of the day, not unlike what was posted here! There's a lot of value in taking something small like this and building off of it. Just linking to that vanilla JS site is snarky and unproductive.